Can we talk about Contemporary Fiction

Contemporary fiction is my go-to genre, I love a book that feels current and love when it explores telling a story in a new and dynamic way. I struggle with classic fiction because I find it hard to connect with the characters and (usually) the slower pace. This year out of what I’ve read so far 10 books I would define as contemporary, and out of that 10 I think I’ve only really enjoyed 2, out of those 2 neither I would put down as a favourite. I’m not desperate to read again them again or thrust in the hand of a friend. I feel oddly nervous posting this, mainly because I don’t really want to seem negative or disrespectful of someones book but I have literally hit a brick wall when it comes to cliche characters/plots, yet the books are still getting rave reviews. Here I’m digging a little deeper into my thought process after finishing a well reviewed book.

The issue I’m having is the tropes that are appearing again and again. I know cliches come about because they tend to be true and I am a believer that cliches aren’t always a bad thing in books as long as there are other layers. When I write I know that I can lean into some common cliches too, I feel some can be done well and it can even add to the story. But recently I’ve been finding it hard to connect to characters, or even find that characters feel real and multidimensional.

To be honest Crushing by Genevieve Novak is the book that pushed me over the edge. I’ve taken a good look at this and broken down why. This is the book that has bought me here to talk to you and possibly find new recommendations in contemporary fiction. Crushing left me feeling so frustrated that I looked back over the books I’ve read recently and realised that the same thing is happening over and over. This post contains spoilers, so if you are hoping to read Crushing you’ve been warned. If you have already read the book and have any thoughts then let me know!

A brief summary of the storyline is that Marnie has gone through a recent break up. She is in her late 20’s and has come to the realisation that she is a serial monogamist and has never actually been single. She struggles with knowing who she is when not in a relationship. She explores the big question “who are we when we’re on our own?”

All in all Marnie, the protagonist grated on me, I found her humour quiet crass and she moaned and whined about everything (it did not help that I listened to this on audible) whilst still trying to come across as a modern independent woman. She described herself as a serial monogamist, and has only become to realise that she is a chameleon girlfriend, she declares she wants to work on herself rather than throw herself at the first guy she meets. But what does she do? She throws herself at the first guy she meets. Issac, who she talks to in a bar, she falls for him despite from the offset tells her he is in a relationship. My biggest issue is that she actively pursues him despite his initial honesty, she calls and texts him on the daily and then, when they sleep together she picks apart all his faults and once his relationship goes sour she’s not interested. Issac is obviously wrong to cheat, but are we meant to look past Marnie’s behaviour? If a guy were to actively pursue a woman in a relationship, who he sleeps with and then bins would be villianised, is it different if a woman does it?

Claud, the new roommate is also late 20’s or maybe even early 30’s and single when Marnie first moves in with her. Suddenly she falls in love, extremely quickly, with her tinder/bumble date. All she can focus on is whether or not he likes her? Has he text her? was she flirty/interesting enough etc. We don’t really get to know Claud further from being total doormat girlfriend. She is the friend that disappears when in a relationship, she barely stays at home and when she responds to any of Marnie’s texts it’s short and sweet. Again the premise of the book is meant to be “who are we when we are on our own” but between Issac and Claud, Marnie doesn’t give herself a moments rest. When Marnie meets Claud’s new bf he declares they do not drink, they do not swear among other emotionally controlling behaviour. Claud desperately wants Marnie to be tight lipped and go along with this to not rock the boat. The reader recognises that this isn’t a lasting relationship despite Claud clinging on. We are meant to celebrate her win when she dumps him, rather than challenge how she ended up in that relationship. Or again ask why the writer is normalising these relationship traits?

Another lead female character Nicola, her sister, was the typical new mother. This character is something that I see constantly in books, tv and movies. The exhausted, frazzled unhappy mother. Nicola is constantly complaining about how mundane her life is, how hard it is to be a mother. There are scenes of her caring for her child when she is sick and also caring for her useless husband because he is also sick and unable to find medicine etc. Essentially being made out that she is a super mum, because only she knows the bedtime song, the correct pyjamas for her baby to wear for them to settle to go to sleep. Instead of challenging the male behaviour of being a useless (albeit present) Father. Ultimately when Marnie calls her sister out on the complaining she is horrified, because motherhood she declares is amazing a gift. we get the cliche speech how she wouldn’t change for the world. *yawn* Are women really not allowed to complain about motherhood? I much preferred the comical take on the passive aggressive comments about motherhood we see in Bandit Queens.

Then we come to the men!! I can’t even separate them in description. Other than being handsome they are all wet cloths, either controlling, lazy or completely misogynistic. I feel like if there were a book that the female characters were written this basic most people reading it would question why? But there is a tendency for men to be reduced to be extremely basic with no redeeming qualities, yet, still they get the girl, she still loves them or wants to be loved by them, essentially they feel as if they the woman are the lucky ones. Can’t we do better, can’t we teach our children or young adults to expect more and better, the way we do this is by including characters that have depth. By introducing men who are good people, have depth, quality makes women want more from their current or future partner, rather than only reading about basic men and presume that’s what all men are like.

I know I power phrased and gave a general view of the book, maybe I just missed the whole point. Maybe the few paragraphs that discuss the platonic love of female friendship or choosing to be single despite the invisible biological clock ticking is meant to make the previous few hundred pages ok? Maybe it’s meant to be lighthearted and fun and I’ve lost the plot.

I feel like if it were just one of the characters then I would be able to accept it. I just found it tedious, mainly because I’ve read quite a few in short concession that are sold as strong, modern protagonists but are actually just rather self absorbed and needy.

I think it is totally fine to want more from a book, to look at characters and try to break down why they don’t sit right with you. This is how we learn and grow. I’m falling out of love with contemporary fiction, and this is a post in desperate hope of finding some books that can turn it around for me. Right now I feel like I need to expand my contemporary pool, so if you have any recommendations then let me know!